To incentivise active engagement with investments and the development of a diversified asset portfolio for retirement, the government has introduced subsidized, tax-efficient financial products. Drawing on the narratives of 60 UK individuals, this paper reveals the unintended outcomes of financial products being employed as governmental technology. Whereas performativity studies have explored how institutional changes, discourses and devices impact financial practices, they concentrate on devices employed within institutions such as calculative tools, models and rankings rather than everyday financial products and their accompanying constraints. This study responds to this gap by centring the characteristics of financial products within a layered performativity framework and incorporating inequalities inherent in a capitalist welfare state. By unravelling the interaction between the characteristics of financial products and income and work constraints, this paper extends understandings of overflows within a performativity framework. Government-supported financial products inadvertently construct the conditions for passive financial practices, being utilized as savings tools instead of as a stepping stone for active engagement with investments. Yet, these mis- or backfires of financial products nevertheless conform to norms of self-reliance, showcasing how seemingly contrasting elements of performativity can be present at the same time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ariane Agunsoye (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: